Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - SITE
Permit Number - T09CM02290
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/30/2009 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: T09CM02290 645 W Plata Street General Manufacturing Use: Site Plan review TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 30, 2009 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with redlines and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. As indicated in the previous comment 16, additional comments could be forthcoming based on revisions to the plans, please address the following comments as requested. 1. Based on the decision to replace the class one bicycle parking facility with class two the requirements for the class two bicycle facilities apply. The facility must meet the space or dimension requirements, the facility may not be further than 50 from the front door, Pedestrian circulation from the facility must be provided and connect to the onsite pedestrian circulation, if the facility is not visible from the street frontage provide directional signage and access to the facility may not be the sidewalk. The path to the facility may cross a sidewalk in a perpendicular manner only. See development standards 2-09. Due to some issues we have been having with class one facilities I took the issue to Glenn Moyer for a different consideration on the requirements for class one facilities. We discussed how we could allow the owner or developer to provide the class one facility within the building and what kind of requirements would be needed. At one point we thought that a closet that provided the necessary dimensions and was secured by locks would work. Then we discussed whether or not that much security would be required if the employee himself had his bicycle placed in his work space. Glenn allowed us to approve a plan that includes a note that states that the class one facility or parking would be allowed with in the building and the number of spaces needed to meet code. No detail would be required other than the note. If you wish to reconsider the class one parking inside the building, add the required note to the site plan. PREVIOUS COMMENT NO. 5: Off-street bicycle parking, including materials for lighting, paving, and security; fully dimensioned layout; location; specific type of rack and the number of bicycles it supports; and the location and type of directional signage. Per your notes on bicycle parking, the bicycle facility is to be provided within the building. As you are aware there is nothing in DS 2-09 at this time hat lists the provisions or criteria for any bicycle parking within a building. Provide a detail drawing that demonstrates compliance for class one bicycle parking within the building. The DSD director may make a decision on whether the proposed facility provides the applicable requirements. Also this type of development is required to provide 90% class one and 10% class two bicycle parking facilities. It does not appear that any class two facilities have been provided. Draw, label and dimension both facilities. Add fully dimensioned detail drawings for both types of facilities. DS 2-02.2.1.A.9 2. Only the second paragraph of the previous comment was addressed. Please address the following based on the first and third paragraphs. When I asked about the vehicular use in front of the building I wanted to know what was happening across the entire front of the building. Technically a sidewalk is required between a PAAL and a building and must be physically separated. A partial sidewalk has been added but there is still about 75% of the building without a sidewalk. Please clarify if there a proposal for bay doors if not add the sidewalk. Reference the third paragraph. Per the email from Jose Ortiz he has agreed to allow the gates as proposed on the drawing with the stipulation that the gates remain open during business hours. Add a key note that states so. PREVIOUS COMMENT NO. 7: Clarify if the vehicular use area in front of the building is to access the building or if there is a specific purpose for this area. If this is to be vehicular use area a sidewalk adjacent to the building must be provided. The sidewalk must be physically separated from the vehicular use area. Indicate in a note or key note that all the vehicular use areas are to be paved. Check with the DSD engineering section for any requirements for street sidewalks along the perimeter project site. Usually the minimum sidewalk width is five feet and curb returns may be required at the drive-way entrance. The proposed gated entry must meet the Draft Standards for gated entries. Approval from Traffic Engineering's Jose Ortiz, Zoning review, and DSD Engineering is required. I suggest that you contact Jose Ortiz with traffic engineering first and present the drawing for his review first as ultimately in this case the final word would be his as I do not see that it affects any zoning requirements. (A requirement for the gate to remain open during working hours as a condition of approval would be a Zoning Requirement based on this gate design and location.) DS 2-02.2.1.A.11 and .12 3. For consistency, ensure that any changes that are made to the site plan are also made to the landscape plan. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. C:\planning\cdrc\DSD\T09CM02290.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents |
| 11/03/2009 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | This project has been conditionally approved on the context that Environmental Services approves curb side refuse collection. |
| 11/04/2009 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. This comment was not addressed from the previous review: All landscape areas will be depressed to accept water flow from roofs, PAAL, and parking areas. Show by detail or spot elevations how landscape areas will accommodate water harvesting. The entire landscape areas must be depressed as indicated on the Grading Plan Section A on Sheet C1.1. Revise as necessary the Standard Details and Landscape Note #1 and identify water harvesting areas on plan. 2. The landscape plan shall indicate use of all runoff, from individual catch basins around single trees to basins accepting flow from an entire vehicular use area or roof area. 3. The site plan and landscape plan must show identical site layout to avoid conflict between the two plans. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape plan. 4. Additional comments may apply. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/20/2009 | THAUSER1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |